header-logo header-logo

A difference of opinion

04 October 2007 / Charmaine Murray , Lee Parkhill
Issue: 7291 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Functions of a public nature should be defined on a case by case basis. Lee Parkhill and Charmaine Murray explain

In YL v Birmingham City Council and others [2007] UKHL 27, [2007] 3 All ER 957 their lordships considered the scope of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), s 6(3)(b), which allows for bodies other than core public authorities to be subject to the obligation, contained in s 6(1), which requires them to act compatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention).

An otherwise private body may be regarded as a public authority for the purposes of HRA 1998 if, per s 6(3)(b), it performs “functions of a public nature”. Such a body is commonly referred to as a hybrid public authority. The obligation on such hybrid bodies to observe Convention rights attaches only to functions which are of a public nature. Therefore, determining the scope of s 6(3)(b) is necessary not only to identify which bodies are subject to the obligation in s 6(1), but also to determine

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll